This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Topic: Foreign Bases Country: Germany
Germany is seen as a headquarters to foreign bases. Germany holds the Ramstein Airbase, from where 40,000 US Soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan. We believe that this link between countries is what gives the western powers the upper hand in the “War on Terror. We see these foreign bases gives us a framework, where two countries military can join hands and strive to achieve a single linked goal. We see foreign bases as a link not only in the area of warfare but also in the area of economics. NATO bases in Germany are viewed as essentials to security to fight against terrorism and protect our country. German military officials are working together with foreign military officials from the USA to invest into creating Germany as centre to connect the European powers and US help regain political stability in the region of Middle East. But, We would like the US military to think about plan to integrate higher levels of German forces in their bases, We believe that by doing this our forces achieve not only greater skills in the field but also friendly connections in the Military forces. We would like to further develop frameworks with powers such as the US to improve our government‟s policies towards the establishments of Foreign Bases.
Committee: UNODA Topic: Foreign Military Bases Country: Republic of Indonesia
Following the end of World War II, the world has seen how military bases have, through incidents such as the protection of civilians in Panama in 1998 and the forced retreat of Iraqi troops from Kuwait during the 1991 Gulf War, proved itself consistent in its one goal: international peace. Foreign military bases (FMBs) are invaluably advantageous in that they help build up long-lasting political institutions, work as stable and reliable flows of information, and strongly maintain a foreign country‟s influence abroad. However, the country of Indonesia acknowledges the fact that the key to the success of these FMBs lies in an effective and specific legal framework. Although Indonesia recognizes the flaws of FMBs and is deeply troubled by it, it has, and encourages other nations to, prioritize the welfare of its entire country in respects to national security and its foreign relations. Therefore, it urges the need for the enactment of system of regulations regarding FMBs that is impervious to the influence of powerful countries. Indonesia‟s stance has already been expressed in the way that its president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, while seeking to retain an even-handed foreign policy, has favored an increased U.S. presence in the South China Sea. It believes that this may be the solution to the rising tension that is prevalent that region. With a military base checking and analyzing the increasing conflicts of the country, it can help predict terrorist activities as well as assist in maintaining a country‟s transparency. Indonesia believes that foreign military bases allows each country to be responsible for its own sovereignty by setting proper regulations and agreements through SOFAs, its own safety by providing proper protection, and its own transparency by allowing others to monitor activity, detect patterns and draw conclusions within the host country. It looks forward to working with other delegates towards a legal framework that will set regulations, provide boundaries and carry out uniform inspections on foreign military bases to ensure the reaching of that base‟s intended goals.
UNODA/ Position Paper/ Republic of India Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) Topic: Foreign Military Bases Country: Republic of India Following the end of the Cold War, we see a new era of prevalent foreign military presence emerging in international politics. In view of a world plagued by rampant international terrorism, socio-economic instability, and socio-political strife, the Republic of India recognises the grave necessity of foreign military bases (FMB) for countries and international organisations to: maintain and secure their overseas presence and spheres and influences, assist their allies with the aim of combating international terrorism in the War on Terror, and enable governments in building stable, lasting institutions. Most importantly, the establishment of FMBs is essential to the common cause of nations in fortifying long-term regional security. The Republic of India believes that in order for our allies and partners in the international community to achieve these goals without infringing the sovereignty of other State Parties, the legal framework for the establishment and management of these overseas military institutions must be intact, watertight and fair. It imperative to guarantee the nonimpeachment of sovereignty and the civilian rights of the citizens living in the vicinity of these foreign military bases. The Republic of India considers FMBs as a priceless asset that contributes significantly to international peace, near and far. The United States‟ (US) and United Kingdom‟s (UK) presence, together with the balance of power and regional security, is closely linked with their military bases established there. To iterate the beneficiaries of FMBs, India‟s delegation examines the US Bagram military base in Afghanistan, which proved to be crucial in the capture and killing of the notorious terrorist leader of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden. The elimination of Osama bin Laden was a milestone in regional and international peace, a feat impossible without the employment of FMBs by the United States in Afghanistan in the earlier Operation Enduring Freedom. FMBs have also played a decisive strategic role in the War on Terror, resulting in reduced terrorist attacks and greater socio-political stability for numerous States, including the Republic of India. Furthermore, the joint US-UK military base in Diego Garcias in the Indian Ocean, among other FMBs, has played a major military, strategic, and logistics role in the Afghan War in 2001. The Republic of India believes that the FMBs in the British Indian Territory, and later those established by the US government in Afghanistan, have an irreplaceable role to play in maintaining regional stability that is crucial to nation-building and peacemaking. Looking into the Far East, The Republic of India again recognises the role of FMBs in maintaining East-Asian stability, particularly the military presence of US troops on Okinawa, Japan, India‟s long-standing ally and friend. Under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and
Security Between the United States of America and Japan (January 19, 1960) , the government of United States of America is able to station troops on the island of Okinawa, which is crucial to check North Korean military ambitions, a major threat to the entire stability of East Asia. Witnessing and recognising the importance of cooperation and coordination for the common cause of securing stability and free from fear of terrorism, India has provided extensive support to the anti-Taliban Afghan Northern Alliance (ANA) in Tajikistan. In 2002, India built a hospital at the Farkhor Air Base, located 60 km from the Afghan border, to treat wounded ANA fighters. For instance, the leader of the ANA Ahmed Shah Massoud was rushed there after a fatal attack on his life on September 10, 2001. India has also promised to aid in Tajikistan‟s defence and is presently providing training to the Tajikistan Air Force. The Farkhor Air Base became fully operational in 2006 and, with collaboration and help from our friend and host, the Farkhor Air Base has played a treasured and unique role in eradicating terrorist factions in the country.  Notwithstanding, the Republic of India discerns and is troubled by the controversies and detriments associated with foreign military bases. Facilitated by the FMBs there, US military presence in Afghanistan, another key ally of the Republic of India, has been crucial in its post-war reconstruction. India is vexed by the tragedies associated with foreign military bases, most notably in the case of a massacre near a US base at Kandahar on 11 March, 2012, which led to 16 deaths.  Such ad hoc killings have been well documented and are not limited to US military bases in Afghanistan. In October 2012, an US soldier stationed at Okinawa, Japan, has entered a resident quarter and sexually assaulted a woman. Such senseless killings and crimes beyond comprehension, such as those taking place in Afghanistan, have stained relationships between India‟s allies and given ground to insurgent and terrorist fractions in the south-Asian region, directly harming the interests and well-being of south-Asian people and countries.  India‟s delegation is deeply troubled by such incidents and expresses the deepest condolences and sympathies to our friends and allies across the world. Viewing that both Afghanistan and Japan are strong and important partners of India, our sadness could not be greater. Therefore, in spite of recognising the grave need for FMBs for the maintenance of regional stability, India calls for a fair, justified and comprehensive legal framework that prevents such horrendous incidents from repeating, and reasonable mechanisms of trial that would bring such troops to justice.
Footnotes  http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/ps/japan/mutual_cooperation_treaty.pdf
 http://web.archive.org/web/20080227152412/http://www.ipcs.org/Oct_04_militaryAirforc.pdf  http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2001475,00.html  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/world/asia/2-us-navy-sailors-arrested-in-okinawa-
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) Topic: Foreign Military Bases Country: The Republic of the Philippines
The Republic of the Philippines, recognizing the many effects caused by foreign military bases, acknowledges the needs to clarify the purposes of such bases and to revise the standards and rules regarding them in order to minimize the negative effects caused by such establishments.
The Philippines has a 60-year-old mutual defense treaty with the United States and participates in annual exercises with its military. The Filipino military has also been working closely with U. S. Special Forces troops in our fight against Islamic terrorist groups in the southern portion of our county since 2001. Noting the good relation and partnership between our military and the American forces based in our country, the Philippines recognizes the various benefits of such military bases.
The establishment of foreign military bases stimulates the economy, providing employment for local contractors and suppliers and bringing economic prosperity to local communities as it provides a new market for goods. They are used by friendly and allied nations for security and peaceful purposes only, and they also serve as an armed force backup which can react quickly and give support to the local armies in case of unexpected humanitarian crises, thus enhancing forward-based military capabilities.
In addition, the existing military bases contribute to the enhancement of international geopolitical stability. Not only are they creating a geopolitical framework that can absorb the inevitable shocks and strains of socio-political change, they are also evolving into the geopolitical core of shared responsibility for peaceful global management.
In order to protect the principles of humanity, neutrality, and impartiality and at the same time be prepared to use these valuable resources in extraordinary circumstances, foreign military bases should not be removed.
However, noting with deep concern that there have been accidents and misconceptions arising from such bases, the Philippines suggests host nations of foreign military bases as well as the nations sending its forces to revise their Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) so to improve transparency, clarify the purposes of such bases and promise respect for the sovereignty of the host country. For instance, foreign militaries should promise to abide by the laws of the host
country. It should also be stated clearly on the SOFAs that those militaries will utilize their overseas military bases to provide support and training to the militaries of the host country.
Foreign military bases are important media for relief operations, military assistance and security against disasters and most importantly, terrorism on a global basis. They also bring economic benefits to local communities. Hence, the Philippines once again affirm its support for foreign military bases, albeit improvements on SOFAs are needed.
Israel Position paper
Concerning the topic of foreign military bases, Israel believes foreign military bases can prove to be either a massive threat or a defensive measure. Israel believes that these foreign military bases are necessary, however they are not always in order. Israel justifies its reasons for placing military bases in foreign countries as Israel‟s top concern is the safety of its own nation, and in order to do this, these actions must be taken. However, if military bases are put into place offensively, Israel believes this is a massive breach in sovereignty and this issue must be dealt with before too much damage will be inflicted. Israel believes that action that should be taken in order to address this issue include for contracts to be put in place so that these military bases can operate without intervention. These military bases should be operating for the benefit of their own people, and thus Israel believes by instantiating the intent of the placement of a new military base, that military base can function without interruption.
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs Topic: Foreign Military Bases: South Korea
The delegation of South Korea acknowledges the potential effects, whether it be positive or negative, of having a foreign military stationed in another sovereign nation. In 1953, we sanctioned the Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States of America, which is a status of force agreement. Through the years, we have seen the beneficial effects that foreign military presences provide. These benefits include, but are not limited to, military security, international political peace, and socio-economic stability. Like the (country names who also support this), we desire to preserve political and socio-economic peace within destabilized countries, and are willing to cooperate with the countries within NATO. However, we do not wish to be identified as part of the organization. Despite the support we offer to (fill in the blank), we also acknowledge the problematic possibilities a foreign military presence without strict regulations may pose to the host country, as we had experienced this firsthand with the 2002 Yangju Highway Incident, where the Mutual Defense Treaty and the South Korean justice system were exploited. As a result, we have conducted many revisions and modifications to the Mutual Defense Treaty and have drafted new treaties and documents on relatively controversial topics. Taking into all of the above points listed, we would like to acknowledge the positive effects from foreign military bases, but we also respect the sovereignty of states. Therefore, we believe that strict guidelines must be established and implemented so that the states‟ sovereignty will not be compromised.
Committee: Topic: Country:
UNODA Foreign Military Bases United States of America
As the United States of America, we strongly believe that foreign military bases are both, conducive and essential towards protecting the sovereignty of our nation and also, instrumental towards building world peace and resolving conflicts overseas.
The government of USA recognizes that there are numerous overseas projects that our nation has invested a significant and substantial amount of time into that need to be protected against foreign intervention or involvement. We strongly believe that the government has an inherent responsibility to defend various business or economic interests overseas with regards to protecting the security of the American people, which can only be fulfilled with the use of foreign military bases. Furthermore, since the United States is a key player in various economies, especially in Western Europe and now South-East Asia, it is essential that there are foreign military bases that have resources to safeguard American economic interests and ensure that they are being secured and prevent any unnecessary or unwarranted foreign intervention. For example, a large proportion of the manufacturing for clothing and textile industries in the United States is in factories in China or South-East Asian countries such as Thailand or Vietnam. Hence, The United States sees stationing foreign military bases in the area as instrumental towards protecting American clothing industries in nations disconcerted with ongoing internal conflict.
In terms of working towards world peace, the United States has long been a key spearhead in leading the effort in achieving world peace. Because the United States realizes that a sustained effort to attain world peace is needed for long-term economic growth and development for all countries alike, we strongly believe that any possible measure that will potentially be able to achieve peace between nations should be encouraged and enforced. Thus, we believe that stationing foreign military bases is needed to ensure that nations around the world are working towards peace and to resolve various difficulties and conflicts in certain areas, for example, the Middle East. Hence, having foreign military bases is seen as part of the United States‟ effort in working towards achieving world peace in the long term.
Overall, the United States of America views having foreign military bases as a situation with no downside, whereby domestic interests and the security of the American people can be protected internationally. It is ultimately with these bases that collectively, all nations are drawn towards world peace and civic order.
Committee: Topic: Country:
UNODA Foreign Military Bases Uganda
Uganda supports foreign military bases within our territories. In the past, during the Clinton administration, the African Crisis Response Initiative was set up to train the militaries of certain African countries, including Uganda. More recently, the United States has provided logistical support and military trainers in Uganda‟s war against Joseph Kony and his rebel Lord‟s Resistance Army (LRA).
The LRA terrorized northern Uganda for two decades and has now moved into neighboring countries. It is believed that the neighboring countries of Uganda have been supporting the LRA, which makes Joseph Kony and the LRA part of the global war on terror. Uganda is one of America‟s key partners in Africa and has established itself as a leader advancing efforts to resolve conflicts throughout the region. Countering violent extremism, especially organizations like the LRA , is important to a stable, secure and prosperous future for Uganda as well as the African continent.
We believe that military cooperation between the two countries has been effective in providing substantial military aid against the LRA. Therefore, we believe that foreign military bases can provide instant and effective assistance.
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs Topic: Foreign military bases Country: Turkey (represented by Yew Chung International School) Delegates: Jessica Yu, Coco Xiao
A foreign military base is a facility directly owned and operated by a foreign country as establishing or even expanding a nation‟s sphere of influence to the region. It is in a tangible form to shelter military equipment, personnel and facilitates training.
In general, a military base provides accommodations for one or more units. It may also be used as a command center, a training ground, or a proving ground. In most cases, a military base relies on outside help to operate. It is usuaaly operated on a country based.
As Turkey is located in a notoriously dangerous geographical location, ensuring our national safety is always of paramount importance.
In Turkey, we allow certain US-based military bases. These are kind of necessary to counter balance the threats from Iran and Syria. The US has requested us to house their nuclear Turkey, and also Iraq, allows military
warheads to prevent any possible attack from Iran.
facilities in our own countries as coordination centers for „behind the lines‟ intelligence missions into Iran and Syria.
Currently, US are keeping 60 to 70 B61 nuclear bombs in the military bases in Turkey. The US has provided Turkey with US nuclear weapons in line with Washington's interests in the region and allowed the US army to transfer them to another place in case of the outbreak of dangerous clashes in the region.
We of course, have reservation to see transportation of such weapons in our country, such as deployment of aircraft in the Incirlik air base. Despite repeated requests by the US, we still
oppose the US transferring nuclear bombs in our territory.
However, the costs for US and Turkey to maintain these bases are high. The cost of running over 1000 military bases overseas is over $100billion annually and excludes costs for Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Turkey, we allow certain US-based military bases. These are kind of necessary to counter balance the threats from Iran and Syria. The US has requested us to house their nuclear Turkey, and also Iraq, allows military
warheads to prevent any possible attack from Iran.
facilities in our own countries as coordination centers for „behind the lines‟ intelligence missions into Iran and Syria.
It is undeniable that keeping military bases in a country have both benefits and threats at international and domestic level.
To many nations, military bases on the grounds are undermining international peace and security, as they are stations meant to prepare for war. Many countries have demanded closure of military bases because of their impact on land, water resources, communications, environment and health, cultural identity. There are also many news about crimes associated with foreign troops. Some may be conflicting with local people and some are violating humanitarian international laws.
In Turkey, military bases have positive impacts on international level. Turkey is aware that these bases bring threats to certain countries. Turkey hopes that foreign military bases can serve its purpose on securing trade routes, obtaining intelligence, protecting a nation‟s economic interest in the area, delivering humanitarian aids and delivering military supplies. And we do support any possible resolutions for solving the threats occurred as a result of the military bases.
In conclusion, setting up military bases has always been viewed as a counter-balance policy against the rising influence of a nation state by another nation. Turkey hereby appeals for cooperation of all countries to maintain global peace and safety. Before this is achieved, maintaining a military base in our country seems to be a necessary evil.
Council: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs Topic: Foreign military bases Country: Swiss Confederation
Switzerland believes that foreign military bases are an outdated concept with the majority of current ones existing as a way for member states to consolidate power overseas and to use them for their own political and personal interests. Although Switzerland acknowledges that host countries cede part of their national sovereignty in return for the security and extra military assistance offered by foreign military bases, many of these may not have such purpose and simply be the residue of colonial war or the more recent Cold War.
The global military network of military bases can be seen as a threat to the national security of any country not siding with major stakeholders in these networks and therefore threatens the international trust and understanding that is part of the UN mandate. The world is changing and along with these changes, the role of foreign military bases in military strategy must also be reassessed along with the legitimacy and their impact on the security conflicts of our world.
New rules must be made to solve the long-standing issues caused by foreign military bases such as environmental and social problems. The testing of new conventional and nonconventional weapons and technology including nuclear arsenal poses pollution and health hazards to surrounding communities and the environment. Research has also proven that communities surrounding military bases experience high levels of rapes violent crimes and loss of land or livelihood, and pollution and health hazards caused by the testing of conventional or non-conventional weapons.
Switzerland is also extremely concerned about the signing of agreements between host and occupying countries, allowing soldiers to be immune from all local laws. It find‟s this particularly disturbing as this preferential treatment may leave victims of the common crimes of rape, crime and car accidents by foreign serviceman unable to claim damages or justice while the offenders enjoy legal immunity.
On an international level, there also needs to be much discussion regarding how these foreign military states affects national affairs and also the world stage and security. It is important that a state retains its national sovereignty and still has control over it‟s national affairs and decision with the state. These bases also promote the proliferation of weapons by acting as
storage facilities for weaponry and arms, increasing tensions between states and international instability. Switzerland aims to engage first in discussion about how to first solve these issues to solve the problems currently plaguing foreign military bases. It recognizes, that for the international community to come to a consensus on this question, much discussion will be required and hopes that through this conference, the role of foreign military bases may be consolidated. Switzerland encourages delegates to not about the complete eradication of such bases, but also how they may be used to promote peace and for humanitarian purposes.
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) Topic: Foreign Military Bases Country: The Islamic Republic of Pakistan
The Islamic Republic of Pakistan acknowledges the potential benefit of having foreign military bases, yet it could have negative effects in the case of “War on Terror”. Since the United States invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, Pakistan has lost more than 35,000 people, the vast bulk of them were civilians. While the U.S. has had slightly over 1800 soldiers killed in the past 10 years, Pakistan has lost over 5,000 soldiers and police. The number of suicide bombings in Pakistan has gone from one before 2001, to more than 335 since. We condemn the United States for its drone attacks in Pakistan territory in the name of eliminating al-Qaeda and Taliban militants as we are seeing this as a violation to our sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, Pakistan would continue to fight against the Islamic extremist. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan would like to have any use of Pakistani bases by foreign forces to be approved by the Pakistani parliament and set new flying rules for Pakistan Air Force with the NATO-led forces for areas contiguous to the border. We believe that foreign bases and assistance could be valuable under the approval of the host country and a developed framework for foreign military bases.
Foreign Military Bases - Georgia
Georgia views Foreign Military Bases as an crucial issue due to the fact that foreign military bases are a major cause of tension and socio-political strife between countries, even more so in Georgia. We share a mutual agreement with the other members of the United Nations that our goal is to maintain the health and safety of our global community. However, our first and foremost concern is our own country's well being. Due to the fact that our country and its neighboring regions has long been contested territory ever since its second declaration of independence in 1991 from the former Soviet Union.
On the 17th of February in 2010, Russia held negotiations with the rebel region of Abkhazia to maintain a large, long-term military presence and signed a deal for a military base. Georgia sees this as a threat to its national security and we condemn this decision made by Russia as illegal and part of Russia Occupation campaign of Abkhazia. Therefore in order to maintain security within Georgia borders and it‟s neighbouring regions, we are supportive of the Foreign military bases that the United States have set up in Georgia. First of all, Georgia believes that the FMBs can act as a deterrent against violence in the region, and prevent tragic events, such as the 2008 South Ossetia Conflict, from happening again. Secondly, FMBs would give non-combatants and civilians protection in cases where violence does occur. Thirdly, this protection would extend not only towards civilians but also to the infrastructure of Georgia itself.
However, there are many problems posed by Foreign Military Bases, with the first and foremost being that a country's sovereignty may be compromised. Therefore, Georgia deems the guidelines for establishing and established FMBs must be revised and stricter measures be implemented through SOFAs. In order to prevent renewed conflicts with Abkhazia or South Ossetia, a long-term military presence from the United Nations must be established in Georgia to lower tensions. In pursuit of this goal, Georgia also calls for all Russian military bases in all legal Georgian regions, which include South Ossetia and Abkhazia, be deconstructed.
Georgia believes that as part of the United Nations, the goal of achieving the safety of the global community and especially that of Georgia cannot be achieved without the installation of Foreign Military Bases. Georgia is weary of the tensions in the Caucasus region and by by supporting a military presence in Georgia, Georgia hopes the tension and conflicts in the region will settle down.
Committee: UNODA Country: Syria Topic: Foreign Military Bases
Syria opposes the establishment of military bases on grounds that the reasons for constructing foreign military bases are completely unjustifiable. Firstly, we would like to revise the objectives of nations in constructing foreign military bases. 1. To host military personnel 2. Act as launching platforms for military maneuvers (e.g. Aerial bombing, coordination centers for intelligence missions) 3. Storage facilities for all sorts of weaponry including nuclear arms. 4. Test-ranges for new weapons, including nuclear testing and intelligence operations, such as the world-wide network of “Echelon” bases that monitor all email, phone and data communications traffic. 5. Logistics for military transport 6. Extra-judicial imprisonment and torture of people (e.g. Guantanamo Bay) These countries with foreign military bases have the capability to conduct all of the above operations on their own grounds and have no peaceful necessity to execute them on foreign lands.
Although the constructions of these bases appear to be consensual, the reality in many instances is very different. It is difficult for nations to refuse the demands of powerful nations from constructing these bases in fear of affecting relations.
These foreign military bases damage the hosting nation through polluting their environment, comprising natural reserves and other strategic resources. They are also threatened by the risk of having weapons or military stored on their own grounds deployed against them. International peace and security is undermined, damaging international relationships. Constructing foreign military bases encourages aggressive military action to become accepted as a proper method of defense. This also forms alliances controlled by powerful nations to isolate others for their own objectives. Territorial sovereignty of host nations are violated and placed under foreign control.
The high financial budgets used to build imperialistic networks of foreign military bases are diverged from the co-operation to sustainable development and to the fight against poverty.
We propose to, 1. Remove all foreign military bases before the year 2030 2. Support the local and regional groups that have foreign military bases by sharing information, developing joint strategies, and assisting in campaigns to achieve greater independence 3.Create space in international forums and at the UN for a critical debate both on the legality and necessity of foreign bases as a method of military domination, the need for codes of conduct or „setting minimum standards‟ for the use of existing bases and plans to gradually phase them out.
Committee: UNODA Topic: Foreign military bases Country: The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)
The Palestinian Liberation Organization recognizes the construction of foreign military bases as a violation of the host country‟s sovereignty. The term sovereignty emphasizes on political independence from any higher authority over a geographical area. Foreign military bases grant the user country extraterritorial right within the host State, affronting the host country‟s political power and control over her own country.
The stated rationale for the implementation of foreign military bases is to bring security to unstable regions around the world, and is to serve the needs and interests of the host State. In reality, foreign military bases have more than once accountable for civilian casualties in host countries. This contradicts their initial goal of maintaining peace.
The foreign military bases have failed to ensure that individuals under their authority are abiding by the laws of the host countries laws. Most of the times, individuals charged with crime are sent back to their homeland for trial, rather than being trialed in the host country. This is unfair and unjust to the civilians of the host country, and has the potential to lead to social instability.
While foreign military bases serve for defensive and deterrent purposes in peacetime, but intensify and aggravate regional disputes and conflicts. Our country, with neighboring countries having back-up from foreign military bases, has been suffering from their impacts n our society.
The Palestinian Liberation Organization reiterates our objection to the implementation of foreign military bases, bearing in mind the negative impacts it brings to the host country and international peace.
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) Topic: Foreign Military Bases Country: Nigeria
Nigeria strongly believes that foreign military bases are an important media for relief operations, military assistance, security against disasters and terrorism on a global basis. Nigeria also believes foreign military bases benefit the local economy. Military bases increase or create a market for goods needed by the bases and provide employment. However, Nigeria urges open and transparent and open debate on foreign military bases. Nigeria believes detailed acknowledge about the existence of foreign military bases is necessary to create trust among nations. When nations don´t have to fear for hidden collaborations, a world of peaceful collaboration is again one step closer.
Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs Topic: Foreign military bases Delegation: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The concept of establishing foreign military bases started many centuries ago, and the presence of foreign military bases has especially peaked substantially after the Cold War. However, the number of foreign military bases has been significantly scaled back after the conflicts between countries had ceased in recent decades.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland firmly believes that the existence of military bases is crucial to the maintenance of public order in those countries and the protection of our national sovereignty. Despite the fact that there are past and present conflicts that have demonstrated that overseas military bases can be considered a threat to certain countries‟ national sovereignty, we strongly trust foreign military bases would ensure world peace is sustained and aid is provided for the time of calamity while mitigating the negative repercussions of foreign military bases. Foreign military base forces are dispatched in the course of crises for example, the British troops were engaged in transporting supplies and assisting with the rebuilding work in the affected areas of the Asian tsunami in 2004. Furthermore, the British troops located in Iraq have been assisting in restoring infrastructure and maintaining security since the end of the war in April 2003. We believe that foreign military bases serve the function of peacekeeping and undertaking stability roles in the aftermath of conflicts.
The delegation of United Kingdom believes that, through a strong legal system in determining the functions of foreign military bases and by tightening rules and regulations on the diplomatic privileges of service men, the disputes occurring now regarding foreign military bases would be solved and the legitimate aim of establishing foreign military bases will be attained. We are optimistic that this conference will result in constructive resolutions that will lead to decisive actions. We hope that fellow delegates would join us in confronting this issue.
Foreign military bases- Ukraine We support foreign military bases already present and operating, such as the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol, as long as the country operating the foreign base upholds the agreement with the host country. Our stance on the policy and development of foreign military bases will be influenced by other European nations. However, we are currently not strongly in favour of any new developments of foreign military bases as we do not see the need for any country to build military bases in the lands of other countries. The host countries will receive no profound benefits from allowing other foreign military bases to hinder their sovereignty. The implementation of foreign military bases can lead to dire consequences if abused and not regulated properly.
Delegation: Australia Committee: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) Question of: Foreign Military Bases Currently in the world, there are more than a thousand foreign military bases and installations. Majority is run by the military of the United States, in 130 countries. In the 1990s, the Robertson Barracks, an overseas military base of the United States of America, was set up in Australia for defensive purposes and collective security, although it has not been confirmed as a permanent base, as our Foreign Minister Bob Carr has stated recently. Drawing from the United Nations Report of Disarmament Commission in July 1996, the General Assembly could not reach a consensus on Point V, Clause (b), the “Dissolution of military alliances and the dismantling of foreign military bases”, leaving the recommendation open to future debate. The Security Council had held one of the more current debates on collective security in November 2008. The meeting concluded with a Presidential Statement issued on behalf of the Council, noting the reduction of armaments and armed forces in countries to promote international peace and security. In another, more current debate that occurred in May 2012, the Economic and Social Council urged Asian states to remove military bases from foreign countries to prevent mistreatment to the indigenous peoples, despite the advantages in collective security. There has been critical debate in Australia on the legality and necessity of foreign bases as a method of military domination, since the presence of foreign bases causes unease towards offensive and defensive purposes of such bases. Therefore as a country we have come to the conclusion that military bases should be used only for purely defensive purposes and the strengthening of collective security, and that information on foreign and joint military bases in any country should be open to public scrutiny. These conditions have been set in place for the following reasons: presence of foreign and joint bases in Australia increases the country as a target for attack by enemy nations, while the decisions and planning made in relation to military operations should be open to the public in order for them to determine the interest of Australians and the wider, more diverse interests of the global community.
Foreign Military Bases
Submitted by: Kuwait
The delegation of Kuwait acknowledges that the issue of foreign military bases is a major concern. The delegation of Kuwait recognises that many establishments have brought safety for the sovereignty of nations, and the Delegation understands that Foreign Military Bases (FMB) are aimed to assist their allies, working together to combat international terrorism and to provide support in case of any unexpected humanitarian crises. The delegation of Kuwait sees the foreign military base as a defensive measure that is crucial in order for countries to maintain and secure civilians as well as being responsible for it‟s own sovereignty. Through examination of the U.S military base in Kuwait, we believe that such military base give flexibility to respond to sudden conflicts in the region as Iraq adjusts to the withdrawal of American combat forces. This act is also crucial in investigating the Iranian nuclear program to the threat of terrorism. However, we show our deepest concerns due to the controversies and detriments associated with foreign military bases. A series of tragic incidents has happened in Okinawa, Japan involving members of US military based there. In 1995, a 12-year-old Okinawan girl was raped by three US service personnel sparked outrage. Recently, in October 2012, an U.S soldier stationed in the Okinawa base has sexually assaulted a woman by entering a resident quarter. Later in November 2012, a member of the US military was found guilty of hitting a teenage boy. The delegation of Kuwait believes that with the help of Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs), such goal(s) of preventing controversies and prejudices associated with foreign military bases can be achieved and urges the need for enactment of clarifying the FMBs purpose in host countries without infringing the sovereignty of other parties.
Committee: United Nations of Disarmament Affairs Topic (3): Foreign Military Bases Country: Islamic Republic of Iran Foreign military bases, facilities that are conceived for training purposes, preparation and stockpiling of military equipment, used by national armies throughout the World. According to the military function for which they were established; they can broadly be classified under four main categories: Air force bases, army or land bases, navy bases and communication or spy bases.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is deeply concerned about the growing number of The United States of America‟s foreign military bases, and the nature of the unbounded Status of Force Agreements (SOFAs).
The Islamic Republic of Iran is aware of the judicial problems of SOFAs. It is known that SOFAs are still unbounded up till now, and that most SOFAs grant a large extent of immunity to foreign soldiers, so they don‟t have to abide by the host nation‟s law. For example, in 2004, an American Navy Security Guard killed a singer with his car at Bucharest under drunken conditions and not obeying the traffic signs. In the end, the singer was dead, but an American court martial cleared the guard of manslaughter, resulting in ample protests across Romania.
Not only do SOFAs cause legal problems and oppresses host nations, but also cause political and environmental damages to the host nation. A case in point would be the SOFA between The United States of America and Japan concerning Okinawa. The 1995 rape incident has become a major political issue when the American soldiers were sent back to America for trial despite the victim being a Japanese teenage girl. On the environmental aspect, since the American evacuation of the Subic Naval and Clark Airbase in 1992, experts have found toxic chemicals that were buried in uncontrolled landfills and contaminated the water. Because of the high number of The United States of America‟s and most European countries‟ (e.g. The United Kingdom, Republic of France) foreign military bases, the host nations‟ political stability and environment is severely affected.
The Islamic Republic of Iran was strongly against the establishment of foreign military bases, and still remains so. Concerning the Guantanamo Bay issue, Iran has been actively advocating the close down and further supports the No Base Network to close down all the foreign military bases.
Up till now, Iran remains firm on closing down all foreign military bases. Firstly, it infringes the national sovereignty of the host nations. A state should have the power to exercise its absolute authority (i.e. law making, enforcing collective decisions in society, etc.). However, establishing a foreign military base and granting troops immunity would infringe the host nations control over that piece of land, thus infringing the state sovereignty.
Secondly, The Islamic Republic of Iran is extremely concerned with the unfairness of SOFAs. There is no unified format of SOFAs up till today, and the terms are usually harsh for host nations. However, Iran understands that foreign military bases can‟t be totally closed down worldwide in a short term basis; therefore today Iran aims to achieve two aims to make foreign military bases more beneficial for both sending and host nations. First, Iran calls for a regulation of SOFAs and to offer fair conditions for host nations. In this, through asking foreign soldiers to abide by the national law once out of the base premises, Iran hopes to protect the security of the country. Furthermore, Iran hopes to protect the rights of the people of the host nation. For example, Iran hopes that foreign military bases would restrict any toxic or hazardous materials within the compound so as not to contaminate the surrounding environment. Moreover, the regulation of soldier conduct must be enacted. Iran views conflicts happening between foreign troops and local people as a violation of humanity as incidents that have occurred in the past usually involves violent actions. These calls for action ensures stronger protection for host nations.
Iran also strongly encourages fellow nations to support The International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases (No Base Network). This corporation has been actively hosting campaigns to abolish all foreign military bases and holds numerous seminars yearly. Iran encourages fellow nations to support this corporation and hope that fellow nations would provide necessary aid to the corporation should the need arise to support the same clause that The Islamic Republic of Iran is standing on today.
Submitted by: Malaysia
Topic: Foreign military bases (FMB)
It has come to Malaysia‟s attention that the US has expanded and increased its military presence in several Southeast Asian countries, including Malaysia. Malaysia has no intention of allowing the establishment of foreign military bases within our country. Malaysia feels that the development and hosting of foreign military bases threaten security ties within and with other countries, and can cause environmental and social impacts to our country, including land reduction, chemical changes in the atmosphere caused by high levels of radiation, as well as multiple conflicts happening around or near the military base due to the high alert of intruders. Hence, it is evident that the military bases are contradicting their initial objective by causing social and political instability instead of securing peace.
Malaysia is not willing to act as a board for political games, and also believes that the formation of military bases will greatly reduce our regional influence and international perception. Therefore, Malaysia believes the implementation of foreign military bases should be reassessed and restricted in the interest of securing the country‟s well-being and development. The Delegate of Malaysia looks forward to respectful and meaningful discussions with our fellow MUN delegates. We invite you to join us in confronting this problem.
Hong Kong Model United Nations 2013 Kingdom of Sweden Topic: Foreign Military Bases
To fellow Delegates and Honorable Chair, Sweden does not support the idea of foreign Military bases, we think that this idea is outrageous, and we urge all other countries to close down any bases that are situated outside of their own country. Since our country Sweden is neutral, we don‟t have any foreign military bases, as we don‟t plan on going to war anytime soon. We continue to urge other countries to pull their own foreign military bases outside of other countries in order to calm the threat and back away from the idea of war. When all military bases are gone, then there will be less of a threat of war in all countries, and therefore, less war in general countries across the world. We don‟t feel that it is right to take other countries land as your own to make your own bases.
Hong Kong Model United Nations 2013 South Africa Topic: Foreign Military Bases South Africa recognizes the persistent issue of foreign military bases and believes that it is important that something is done about these issues. The very secretive nature of military bases alone is troubling and South Africa opposes this strongly. Whilst we recognize the integral role of security in a country's existence, we do not believe that this should be done with the government withholding key information that may concern citizen's safety.
This delegate believes that the whole concept of foreign military bases is against the very definition of peace keeping and against the UN‟s beliefs as well. The development of foreign military bases affects one‟s country‟s own national and local security as these foreign military bases may monitor the country‟s affairs. Foreign military bases are also known to stimulate torture and violence within a nation, an example would be the infamous mistreatments within Guantanamo Bay. Torture and violence is practiced even though it is against human rights.
The delegate of South Africa is aware that foreign military bases may be a necessity for war preparations, however South Africa believes that to create peace, one must not approach an issue with violence. Foreign military bases may encourage aggressive military action between nations.
World peace is important, and with this ultimate goal in sight, South Africa is working towards resolving the significant issue of the control of foreign military bases. This delegate looks forward to working with other delegates to create a strong and righteous resolution.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.